3 ms·
> Maybe I'm just disregarding a lot of patent law, but wouldn't it be a better plan to just have all NASA patents open to anyone? I think they're learning fro
by Kalium 11y ago
> Maybe I'm just disregarding a lot of patent law, but wouldn't it be a better plan to just have all NASA patents open to anyone?
I think they're learning from university tech transfer programs. A number of universities tried the exact approach you describe. What they found is that companies weren't interested in the ideas because of the substantial risk of someone out-developing them. A risk significantly increased by a lack of exclusivity. By patenting them and offering transfer of the patent, they got much better uptake.
So this is a case of ideals trading off against reality and results.
- hmahncke 11y agoI agree with your line of thought; however the NASA program described in the link only applies to non-exclusive patents. They state at the end that if you want an exclusive patent, to contact them.
- sitkack 11y agoMost university tech transfer programs don't make money. Typical power law, a handful of ideas (patents) generate the most revenue. I think having the ideas open and make consulting agreements to get them to work would a better model. The same thing that "productized" research also got DARPA out of pure research. The Mansfield Amendment of 1973 and the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayh%E2%80%93Dole_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayh%E2%80%93Dole_Act of 1980.